Nelson Garcia v. Secretary, Florida Department, et al


Opinion issued by court as to Appellant Nelson Garcia. Decision: Affirmed. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam. The opinion is also available through the Court's Opinions page at this link

Download PDF
Case: 16-16339 Date Filed: 11/03/2017 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 16-16339 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:16-cv-21757-JAL NELSON GARCIA, Petitioner-Appellant, versus SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents-Appellees. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (November 3, 2017) Before MARCUS, WILSON, and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 16-16339 Date Filed: 11/03/2017 Page: 2 of 2 Nelson Garcia, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the dismissal of his successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred at sentencing by not orally pronouncing him guilty of attempted first-degree murder, and, furthermore, that the state failed to prove, at trial, that he acted with intent to commit an offense of burglary within a dwelling. A state prisoner who wishes to file a second or successive habeas corpus petition must petition us for an order authorizing the district court to consider such a petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Absent such an order, the district court is obligated to dismiss a successive petition, as the district court lacks subjectmatter jurisdiction to entertain the motion. Hubbard v. Campbell, 379 F.3d 1245, 1247 (11th Cir. 2004) (per curiam). Both Garcia’s initial § 2254 petition and his current § 2254 petition challenged his June 2000 conviction for first-degree murder, burglary, and attempted first-degree murder. Because he failed to obtain authorization from us to pursue his claims, the district court did not err by dismissing them. Accordingly, we affirm. AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?